u/AlivePassenger3859

I’ll stick to the facts and keep it short and sweet. Tell me if I’m in the wrong.

I made an expedited payment to a college for my son’s tuition. The college’s address shows up both under the payee information and when I click to edit payee information.

The check was expedited but it came to my house, two hours from the college.

I’m not upset because my son’s tuition was late. We worked that out.

But I spent 45 minutes on the phone getting tranferred twice and finally talking to a manager who said full stop that they would not refund the 15$ fee. Why you ask?

Because, on a screen that only she could see, it had my home address listed and I “must have entered that in” and therefore “it wasn’t a bank error”.

When I asked her why the only address that shows up on their customer facing ui is the college’s address and that I therefore wouldn’t know the payment wasn’t going there, she said I would need to speak to their third party vendor “Fiserv”.

Am I wrong to be infuriated by this? Thanks.

Mine is drawing faces from old comic books. I’m never going to be great at it, it will never make me any money, and its not even a social activity. My brain just likes it.

I associate surrealistic art with a feeling of unease, dread, queasiness. Dali, most stuff in Juxtapoz, Robert Williams. And that’s fantastic. I’m glad there’s art that can have that affect.

But are there any examples of “happy” surrealism? Something without some horrific subtext peeking through?

But what would that even mean I guess. Can it even BE surrealisn without that edge of quease?

Does he ever say exactly why in the comics? I mean he doesn’t work a nine to five.

Lifespan aside, it is impossible to be on a jog that started infinitely far behind you. You would never have reached the point you are at now.

Similarly, it is impossible that time started infinitely far in the past. We would never have reached the point in time we are at now.

But what would it mean for time to have a “beginning”? That means no events, no interactions between even atoms existed. And how would we possibly go from that to this?

Notes: I came up with this on my own about fifteen years ago, but it is basically the “Kalam cosmological argument”. Its used a lot by Christian apologists, but I am NOT religious at all. In fact, I think religion is a bunch of ignorant superstition.

I can’t personally see any flaws in this reasoning but am totally open to the fact that there may be.

I want to build a deck with both [[git rog ravenous ride]] and [[grolnok the omnivore]] maybe throw in an [[uurg, spawn of turg]] and a [[mirko, obsessive theorist]]

doesn’t have to be a frog, but who would be a good RUB commander for some graveyard shenanigans shooting for high B2 or mid B3?

It has that one more day feel. My longest is probably 3 hours real time.

Indulge me by following along with the following thought experiment.

(For those who would say “but that’s impossible” or “that could never happen” please take a minute to read what a thought experiment is before continuing: [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thought\_experiment?wprov=sfti1](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thought_experiment?wprov=sfti1))

OK, shall we proceed?

Scenario 1: Let’s say you are you in every respect EXCEPT you were born into John Wayne Gacy’s exact circumstances and raised in his environment. Would you then go on to become a serial killer?

Possibly not because you have different genetics than he did. His early environment would probably mess you up a lot since it was horrible, but you might not go full serial killer.

Scenario 2: You have JWG’s exact genetics but were born into a different environment. Would you then go on to become a serial killer?

Possibly not because you will have a different early environment than he had. You might be a bully even have serious mental health problems but you might not go full serial killer.

Scenario 3: You have JWG’s exact genetics AND environment. Would you become a serial killer?

Its pretty clear that any of us would because there’s genes, there’s environment, but that’s it. *There’s no third thing that makes you you.*

So what’s the point? The point is that there’s no free will. You say “I would never have done that”- uh yes you would have.

Compatibilists trying to label something else as “free will”, how do you respond to the thought experiment? All your appeals to complexity, debates about the definitions of “agency” and “choice”, they all evaporate in the face of the overwhelming power of genes and environment.

Let’s talk about motivated reasoning.

compatibilists caring so much about moral responsibility betrays their motivated reasoning.

Compatibilists: If we want conclusion B, then we need A to be the case. Therefore A MUST be the case. We will redefine terms and muddy the waters until we can pretend A is actually the case. Not because A is true, but beacuse we are so invested in conclusion B.

This seems pretty transparent to me and explains a lot of their rhetoric.

But what could be the motivation for LFW? Many, perhaps most, believers in LFW are religious- if I believe in LFW, then it does two things

1. makes me feel special and worthy because I, of my true metaphysical free will, chose this deity, and in so doing deserve all the perks that entails.

And 2) justifies non-believers going to “badplace” after they die. Its not our diety’s fault. He wants everyone to choose him. But alas, some people, if their own free will, reject him.

If course some think that deity just arbitrarily chooses who will and won’t be “saved” but that’s a minority view.

So what could be the motivation for hard determinists? I suppose if I was a real sleazebag or neurotic, I could use it to excuse my own actions.

Somehow , though, from reading this board, I don’t feel like that’s what most determinists are doing. Most seem like they arrived at the conclusion ib search if the truth, whatever that may be.

Of course I’m vulnerable to criticism that I am favoring my owb beliefs in this analysis and of course I am. I’m human after all.

Subjective and impossible to answer, I know. But I’m a noob.

If I were to dip into a year or 2-3 year period and listen to a random show, what time period is most likely to have their S-tier shit? ✌️

I have the Blame Game precon with [[Nelly Borca]] which is RW and the Riders of Rohan deck with [[Eowyn Shieldmaiden]] which is RWU.

I’m thinking about combining them to make a humans-focused goad deck, probably in RWU with Eowyn at the helm.

Is this too many directions? Can I make a low to mid bracket three? Is this just a pipe dream?

Part of me just likes the way it sounds: “Riders of Goadham”. Is it riders? Is it goad? Yes, yes it is.

I’ve been reading on Spinoza- seems like a bomb thrower of epic proportions. Which somehow lead me to Gilbert Ryle.

Pasted below is link to his paper Systematically Misleading Expressions.

These arguments may be well known to readers on this sub, but I found his calling out of philisophical bullshit pretty funny and refreshing.

https://sites.ualberta.ca/\~francisp/NewPhil448/RyleSystemMisleadExpr32.pdf

I’ve had two ideas for tats for awhile now. Both of which I think are “funny”.

I have an appointment tomorrow at a place and am on the fence about which to get. Please help me decide!

Idea one: The tat literally says “cool tattoo”. Then I say want to see my cool tattoo?

Idea two: “This space intentionally left blank”.

Are either of these funny? Are they “cringe”?

The Rock, Face/Off, Con Air. Are they rankable? Is it sacrilegious to even suggest so?

Warning: rambling somewhat self-indulgent Buddhist testimonial ahead. May this have a positive effect on someone somewhere.

I read and tried to practice a lot of spirituality in the past. Buddhism, taoism, twelve step, mindfulness, relaxation techniques, principles from CBT.

All of these did help me manage things like anxiety, my adhd, low self esteem to a certain extent.

But I still did not have any deep sense of inner peace or well being. I’d look in the mirror and knew there was a “real me” in there but had no clue how to access it or who that person even was.

Then in my late 40’s my greatest fear happened. I was fired from a job of ten years that I loved and made great money doing. The firing was about as brutal as possible. It was at my yearly review, the area manager came in and said I could resign or be fired. No warning, no lead up, no option for a work improvement plan, nothing.

I’ve always been somewhat arrogant and cocky. Things have always come somewhat easy for me- people have always liked me, I always got a lot of positive regard both personally and professionally.

So my identity was based on two things: 1)that I am special. I thought I was in a slightly better class than 90% of other people. Funnier, cuter, more focused, smarter, whatever. Just better. and 2) that I wanted my dad to like me. This meant trying to be as much like him as I could, and acheiving things I thought would impress him.

So getting fired was the unthinkable for me. A shattering blow to my ego and whole identity with zero chance to even explore the why. This was my dark night of the soul. I also had two kids in college, wife, mortgage etc.

The first thing I did was start to REALLY practice mindfulness. 24-7, clinging to it like a raft in a storm.

The next thing that happened is I started to REALLY try to practice what I saw as the fundamentals of buddhism: taking this tiny spark of compassion and real warm heartedness for other people and trying to keep that spark alive and if possible stoke it.

This took my hyperfocus off of my own ego, reputation, etc- I started to truly understand and be realistic about who I am and how privileged I am in the grand scheme of things.

I think the hardcore mindfulness allowed me to also view my natural behaviors and personality more objectively and guess what? I’m nothing like my Dad. Oh I’m like him in some superficial ways, but I’m a completely different person. Moving forward, there’s no more shadow of him hanging over me.

And finally I feel that sense of deep well being and peace. I don’t have this ego-monkey on ky back 24-7. Its a huge relief to find out that you’re just everyday people like everyone else!

So that’s basically my story, but the reflection is that I’m almost 100% sure that whatever spiritual progress has been made wouldn’t have happened without the “catastrophic” event.

I couldn’t see anything clearly enough, didn’t have enough willpower or insight or whatever. I had read all the books, done all the practices etc etc, but the life experience is a whole different teacher.

I know what happened to me was incredibly mild too compared to what others go through. I got fired. Happens all the time. I’ve never been abused, divorced, victim of a crime etc.

But again, I guess some of this is under our control but a lot isn’t. The practices up to the point of the event though laid the groundwork and were the map for everything that happened afterward.

So keep laying that groundwork! If you are going through dark times, keep practicing, stick to fundamentals, cling to what really matters.

Why do we consider first degree murder “worse” than second degree murder?

First degree murder: A cheats on B with C. B plans out the murder of C over a few weeks. Buy supplies and murders C.

Second degree murder: Same scenario, but now B walks in on A and C, flys into a rage and murders C with a nearby ash tray.

Same end result, B murdered C, same motive, anger, betrayal, revenge, etc. Just that one was planned out and one was done “in the heat of passion”.

Why do the courts, in the US at least, treat first degree as worse?

Is a guy who murders impulsively better than a methodical murderer? Is one of them more or less likely to kill again?

Maybe its because the murder in a fit of emotion feels more relatable and somehow less sinister than a cold calculating murderer? But “feels” is kind of a weak basis for a justice system.

First degree murder: A cheats on B with C. B plans out the murder of C over a few weeks. Buy supplies and murders C.

Second degree murder: Same scenario, but now as soon as B finds out they fly into a rage go to C’s house a few blocks away with the intent to murder, and does, in fact, murder C.

Same end result, B murdered C, same motive, anger, betrayal, revenge, etc. Just that one was planned out and one was done “in the heat of passion”.

Why do the courts, in the US at least, treat first degree as worse?

Is a guy who murders impulsively better than a methodical murderer? Is one of them more or less likely to kill again?

Maybe its because the murder in a fit of emotion feels more relatable and somehow less sinister than a cold calculating murderer? But “feels” is kind of a weak basis for a justice system.